Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Home on the range where the buffalo roam -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Selectric II who wrote (9292)	10/5/2002 3:01:42 AM
From: chojiro	Respond to of 13815

Just look at their ads and marketing materials, where they vow to work on your behalf to achieve your dreams...to this very day. Fraudulent. I'm not sure where the above comment differs from what I said. Do you disagree that most of the research, most of the analysts that CNBC parades out daily saying "now is the time to buy..." for a whole host of reasons and most other sales pitches were agenda driven. And that agenda was/is to push off, unload inventories of stocks and line the pockets and swell the bank accounts of insiders and investment banks, instead of having the best interests of J6P in mind? Further, have you noticed how few analysts with bearish views they have on CNBC as opposed to the number of bullish analysts? One thing that makes me sigh with disgust is Kudlow and Cramer; when they do their "Bull vs. Bear" segment during their nightly circle jerk. To epitomize these agenda driven shenanigans, their guest bear is not really a bear. He's just not as bullish as their guest bull. A general example: the bull will be suggesting a 70-85% weight in the stocks markets while the bear will only be suggesting 40-50% stocks weighted portfolio. But almost unanimously none suggest holding onto your cash, something called "savings" which Americans now do not even do. I believe it was '97 when the average household went over that ledge of spending more than they earn- I'd have to hunt to find the info now.) And a public stoning for anyone who suggests the old school of 10% weighting in precious metals. I do see their point about gold only being a commodity any more, but I also believe at least a modest position in PMs makes sense now more than it has in a long while, perhaps for the next 3-5 years. <<And they should pay up, even if it means MER, C, GS, and others should be liquidated and their assets distributed to those they screwed.>> That would be a nice form of justice. Hopefully we will see something along those lines now, starting with the Enron, Adelphia, and WorldCom exposures. I occasionally wonder though if we won't see some kind of attempted government bail out of at least one or more of the major brokerage houses- JPM and C have a lot of exposure to Brazil. This weekend's elections down there could be critical. But I don't thing the public will permit it though with out a major revolt. This time, Wall Street went way too far. They were way beyond "too greedy" Unfortunately, deep inside, I doubt it will really change things permanently. What's that saying? "If power corrupts than absolute power corrupts absolutely." BTW, did anyone catch Elaine Chao on CNBC this morning? I couldn't believe she could stand there with a straight face and say the economy is doing far better than the statistics show. Reflecting concerns over U.S. lending exposure, bankers and investors are also closely eying Sunday's Brazilian presidential election. The frontrunner, the leftist candidate Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has threatened to default on Brazil's massive $360 billion of foreign debt marketwatch.com This weekend's fiscal trigger for turmoil is the Brazil elections, which take place Sunday in South America's largest economy. marketwatch.com